bug-coreutils
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Problem with -i ignore-file option in version 6.9 ptx in cygwin envi


From: Jim Meyering
Subject: Re: Problem with -i ignore-file option in version 6.9 ptx in cygwin environment
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 08:57:00 +0200

Graig <address@hidden> wrote:
> I've found that the only way that ptx will correctly use the contents of the 
> ignore-file is if that file is formatted in the Unix style with just an octal 
> 012 (LF) between lines.  If it is formated in the DOS style with octal 015 
> (CR) and 012 (LF) between lines, the results are as though the ignore-file 
> wasn't specified at all.
>
> Attached is a small zip file that demonstrates the problem.  The contents are:
> SplForPtx.txt     - sample input for the ptx command
> ptx_ignore.w.txt  - an ignore-file formatted in dos mode
> ptx_ignore.u.txt  - an ignore-file formatted in unix mode
> MakeSplPtx.bat    - a script that will create output using the two different
>                       ignore files
> ShopTips.w.ptx    - output when using the dos formatted ignore-file
> ShopTips.u.ptx    - output when using the unix formatted ignore-file

Thanks for reporting that.

This is due to the silly binary/text distinction that developers
everywhere have come to love.

In this case, maybe we can make it easier for the folks using Cygwin.
A lot of the coreutils already do this by calling e.g., fopen with "rb".
But ptx uses open, so here's a proposed patch:

diff --git a/src/ptx.c b/src/ptx.c
index 67b70c6..a5cea72 100644
--- a/src/ptx.c
+++ b/src/ptx.c
@@ -523,7 +523,7 @@ swallow_file_in_memory (const char *file_name, BLOCK *block)
   if (using_stdin)
     file_handle = STDIN_FILENO;
   else
-    if ((file_handle = open (file_name, O_RDONLY)) < 0)
+    if ((file_handle = open (file_name, O_RDONLY | O_TEXT)) < 0)
       error (EXIT_FAILURE, errno, "%s", file_name);

   /* If the file is a plain, regular file, allocate the memory buffer all at

Does that solve your problem?
Adding O_TEXT is a no-op on Unix systems.




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]